On 05/09/18 16:29, Fiedler Roman wrote:
> Apart from that, is not the
>
> [GNUPG:] VALIDSIG 25CE8B1D52A5B231543F8D660EE7BE094144A67F 2018-09-05
> 1536157493 0 4 0 1 8 00 25CE8B1D52A5B231543F8D660EE7BE094144A67F
>
> more suited for checking?
Generally: no. It just indicates the signature is cryp
> Von: Peter Lebbing [mailto:pe...@digitalbrains.com]
>
> On 05/09/18 10:45, Fiedler Roman wrote:
> > * Decrypt and verify with gpg1 on receiver side:
> >
> > /usr/bin/gpg1 --no-options --homedir Receiver --no-default-keyring --
> keyring Sender/SenderKey.pub --lock-never --trust-model always --bat
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:31, roman.fied...@ait.ac.at said:
> At which byte offset should I find the signer key fingerprint?
That is an encrypted message and thus can you seen the the signature.
>> Leaving this out would not help because it is easy to
>> figure out the key by trial verification ag
> Von: Werner Koch [mailto:w...@gnupg.org]
>
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 10:08, roman.fied...@ait.ac.at said:
>
> > [GNUPG:] UNEXPECTED 0
>
> The signature is corrupted in that it has a packet which is expected
> only in a key. Or the provided key has a data signature packet etc.
I hope not :-) If any
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 10:08, roman.fied...@ait.ac.at said:
> [GNUPG:] UNEXPECTED 0
The signature is corrupted in that it has a packet which is expected
only in a key. Or the provided key has a data signature packet etc.
How did you create the keyfile and the signature?
> Could it be, that "--thr
> Von: Werner Koch [mailto:w...@gnupg.org]
>
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 19:25, pe...@digitalbrains.com said:
>
> > It could be that recently an option was added to check a signature by a
> > certificate in a file, but in general you need to import a certificate
>
> No, that is nlot the case. We only ad
